I assume this post was meant as an object lesson in how to provoke
hostilities among those who speak your own language -- explode in
vicious abuse in response to a message which, though its contents
might be debatable, is not at all contentious or argumentative in

Very clever of you!

             [log in to unmask]

Bryan Maloney wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Nov 1999, abrigon wrote:
> > (400+-) were totally detroyed. Maybe a good reason for a common lingo,
> > AuxLang is so people can talk to each other and make sure WW1s and like
> > never happen again.
> Rubbish.
> Trash.
> Nonsense.
> Crapola.
> The belligerents in the French Revolution spoke a common language.  The
> belligerents in the English and American Civil Wars spoke a common
> language.  The belligerents in the American Revolution (not counting a
> handful of Hessians) spoke a common language.  Gang-bangers who shoot
> holes into each other usually speak a common language.  The leaders of
> the Wars of the Roses spoke a common language.
> The idea that a universal Auxlang will lead in any way to world piece is
> unsubstantiable twaddle.  Indeed, it is actually contradicted by the
> witness of history.  A shared language is no guarantor of, nor even an
> impetus towards, peace.